scholarly journals Learning from the Experiences of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change: Balancing Science and Policy to Enable Trustworthy Knowledge

2019 ◽  
Vol 11 (23) ◽  
pp. 6533 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gustafsson
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
Production Process ◽  
Science Policy ◽  
Knowledge Production ◽  
Societal Change ◽  
Intergovernmental Panel ◽  
Science And Policy ◽  
The Public ◽  
Boundary Organizations ◽  
Policy Relevance

To create a societal change towards a sustainable future, constructive relations between science and policy are of major importance. Boundary organizations such as the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) have come to play an important role in establishing such constructive relations. This study contributes to the development of empirically informed knowledge on the challenge of balancing different expectations for how the science–policy relation is to be constructed to create trustworthy knowledge and policy decisions, i.e., when to be what and to whom. This study revisits Climategate and uses the public debate on the IPCC’s credibility, legitimacy, and policy relevance that followed Climategate as an analytical window to explore how the IPCC balanced the science–policy relation in a trustworthy manner. The analysis is based on a document study. The study shows how different expectations on the science–policy relation coexist, and how these risks create a loss of trust, credibility, legitimacy, and policy relevance. Thus, for boundary organizations to have a chance to impact policy discussions, reflexivity about the present epistemic ideals and expectations on knowledge production is of major importance, and must be reflected in an organizational flexibility that is open to different strategies on how to connect science and policy in relation to different actors and phases of the knowledge production process.

Scientific Policy Advice in Switzerland: A Case Study on Climate Change and General Insights

2018 ◽  
Vol 27 (1) ◽  
pp. 33-40
Author(s):  
Roger Pfister
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
Science Policy ◽  
Scientific Knowledge ◽  
Policy Making ◽  
National Level ◽  
Policy Decision ◽  
Scientific Policy ◽  
Intergovernmental Panel ◽  
Science And Policy

The Swiss Academies have the experience of three decades of facilitating a dialogue between science and society. This includes the provision of scientific knowledge to policy decision-makers. Climate change is a topic that has been important in this context from the beginning. A recent example of science policy work in this domain has been the analysis of the findings of the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC),1 and the formulation of recommendations for policy-making at a national level in order to tackle the challenges posed by climate change on the population and the environment of Switzerland. Taking this specific example, the current paper showcases how academies can provide scientific knowledge at the science–policy interface to help tackle real-world challenges. With reference to this case study, and based on their longer-term science-policy engagement, this contribution concludes by describing the elements considered as essential for a successful dialogue between the actors in science and policy-making.

scholarly journals Uncertainty and Dissent in Climate Risk Assessment: A Post-Normal Perspective

2012 ◽  
Vol 7 (2) ◽  
pp. 174-195 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jeroen P. van der Sluijs
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
Climate Science ◽  
Deep Uncertainty ◽  
Intergovernmental Panel ◽  
Science And Policy ◽  
Policy Relevance ◽  
Science Policy Interface ◽  
Interface Science ◽  
Scientific Dissent ◽  
Political Configuration

Uncertainty complexity and dissent make climate change hard to tackle with normal scientific procedures. In a post-normal perspective the normal science task of "getting the facts right" is still regarded as necessary but no longer as fully feasible nor as sufficient to interface science and policy. It needs to be complemented with a task of exploring the relevance of deep uncertainty and ignorance that limit our ability to establish objective, reliable, and valid facts. This article explores the implications of this notion for the climate science policy interface. According to its political configuration the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) adopted a "speaking consensus to power" approach that sees uncertainty and dissent as a problematic lack of unequivocalness (multiple contradictory truths that need to be mediated into a consensus). This approach can be distinguished from two other interface strategies: the "speaking truth to power approach," seeing uncertainties as a temporary lack of perfection in the knowledge (truth with error bars) and the "working deliberatively within imperfections" approach, accepting uncertainty and scientific dissent as facts of life (irreducible ignorance) of which the policy relevance needs be explored explicitly. The article recommends more openness for dissent and explicit reflection on ignorance in IPCC process and reporting.

scholarly journals The Evolution of Communicating the Uncertainty of Climate Change to Policymakers: A Study of IPCC Synthesis Reports

2021 ◽  
Vol 13 (5) ◽  
pp. 2466
Author(s):  
Tomas Molina ◽  
Ernest Abadal
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
Economic Systems ◽  
Intergovernmental Panel ◽  
Call To Action ◽  
The Public ◽  
Level Of Confidence ◽  
Ipcc Report ◽  
Degree Of Certainty ◽  
History Of ◽  
Tackle Climate Change

The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) reports on climate change have served to alert both the public and policymakers about the scope of the predicted changes and the effects they would have on natural and economic systems. The first IPCC report was published in 1990, since which time a further four have been produced. The aim of this study was to conduct a content analysis of the IPCC Summaries for Policymakers in order to determine the degree of certainty associated with the statements they contain. For each of the reports we analyzed all statements containing expressions indicating the corresponding level of confidence. The aggregated results show a shift over time towards higher certainty levels, implying a “Call to action” (from 32.8% of statements in IPCC2 to 70.2% in IPCC5). With regard to the international agreements drawn up to tackle climate change, the growing level of confidence expressed in the IPCC Summaries for Policymakers reports might have been a relevant factor in the history of decision making.

Communicating Climate Change across Workplace and Organizational Settings

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Graham Dixon ◽  
Yanni Ma
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
Future Research ◽  
Complex Nature ◽  
Climate Change Communication ◽  
Intergovernmental Panel ◽  
Individual Level ◽  
The Public ◽  
For Profit ◽  
Change Communication ◽  
Reduce Emissions

Addressing climate change requires attention to a variety of communication contexts. While attention has been paid to top-down approaches aimed at individual-level behavior and the beliefs of the public at large, organizations in both the for-profit and nonprofit sectors are increasingly recognized as integral players in solving the climate change challenges that we face today. For instance, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) characterize the commercial sector as having the highest potential to reduce emissions by 2020, suggesting that meaningful actions aimed at climate change mitigation must come from within organizations. However, the diverse nature of organizational communication poses challenges toward effective climate change communication. On the one hand, climate change communication can occur within organizations, where members’ individual behaviors and beliefs can have a significant impact on an organization’s energy consumption. On the other hand, organizations can communicate environmental issues directly to stakeholders and the public at large—though communication can be complicated by the fact that some organizations benefit from instilling doubt in the science of climate change. The complex nature of organizational-based climate change communication allows members of the for-profit and nonprofit sectors to play an important role in cultivating divergent views of climate change. Future research can help promulgate climate change-related awareness and action within organizational contexts.

Introduction: Apprehending Climate Change

1998 ◽  
Author(s):  
James R. Fleming
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
Global Change ◽  
Public Awareness ◽  
Human Dimensions ◽  
Global Environment ◽  
Public Officials ◽  
Social Scientists ◽  
Intergovernmental Panel ◽  
Science And Policy ◽  
Government Documents

Apprehensions have been multiplying rapidly that we are approaching a crisis in our relationship with nature, one that could have potentially catastrophic results for the sustainability of civilization and even the habitability of the planet. Much of the concern is rightfully focused on changes in the atmosphere caused by human activities. Only a century after the discovery of the stratosphere, only five decades after the invention of chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs), and only two decades after atmospheric chemists warned of the destructive nature of chlorine and other compounds, we fear that ozone in the stratosphere is being damaged by human activity. Only a century after the first models of the carbon cycle were developed, only three decades after regular CO2 measurements began at Mauna Loa Observatory, and only two decades after climate modelers first doubled the CO2 in a computerized atmosphere, we fear that the Earth may experience a sudden and possibly catastrophic warming caused by industrial pollution. These and other environmental problems were brought to our attention mainly by scientists and engineers, but the problems belong to us all. Recently, policy-oriented social scientists, public officials, and diplomats have turned their attention to the complex human dimensions of these issues. New interdisciplinary and multidisciplinary collaborations have arisen between scientists and policymakers to examine the extremely challenging issues raised by global change. There has been a rising tide of literature—scholarly works, new journals, textbooks, government documents, treaties, popular accounts—some quite innovative, others derivative and somewhat repetitious. This has resulted in growing public awareness of environmental issues, new understanding of global change science and policy, widespread concerns over environmental risks, and recently formulated plans to intervene in the global environment through various forms of social and behavioral engineering, and possibly geoengineering. Global change is now at the center of an international agenda to understand, predict, protect, and possibly control the global environment. The changing nature of global change—the historical dimension—has not received adequate attention. Most writing addresses current issues in either science or policy; much of it draws on a few authoritative scientific statements such as those by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC); almost none of it is informed by historical sensibility.

scholarly journals Public Engagement in Climate Communication on China’s Weibo: Network Structure and Information Flows

2021 ◽  
Vol 9 (2) ◽  
pp. 146-158 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yixi Yang ◽  
Mark C. J. Stoddart
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
Communication Networks ◽  
Citizen Participation ◽  
Public Engagement ◽  
Information Diffusion ◽  
Public Deliberation ◽  
Information Flows ◽  
Intergovernmental Panel ◽  
Climate Politics ◽  
The Public

This article provides an empirical study of public engagement with climate change discourse in China by analysing how Chinese publics participate in the public discussion around two Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change reports and how individual users interact with state and elite actors on the pre-eminent Chinese microblogging platform Weibo. Using social network analysis methods and a temporal comparison, we examine the structure of climate communication networks, the direction of information flows among multiple types of Weibo users, and the changes in information diffusion patterns between the pre- and post-Paris periods. Our results show there is an increasing yet constrained form of public engagement in climate communication on Weibo alongside China’s pro-environmental transition in recent years. We find an expansion of public engagement as shown by individual users’ increasing influence in communication networks and the diversification of frames associated with climate change discourse. However, we also find three restrictive interaction tendencies that limit Weibo’s potential to facilitate multi-directional communication and open public deliberation of climate change, including the decline of mutually balanced dialogic interactions, the lack of bottom-up information flows, and the reinforcement of homophily tendencies amongst eco-insiders and governmental users. These findings highlight the coexistence of both opportunities and constraints of Weibo being a venue for public engagement with climate communication and as a forum for a new climate politics and citizen participation in China.

scholarly journals The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change: Guardian of Climate Science

2020 ◽  
pp. 295-321
Author(s):  
Eric Paglia ◽  
Charles Parker
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
Climate Science ◽  
Anthropogenic Climate Change ◽  
Institutional Reforms ◽  
Intergovernmental Panel ◽  
The Public ◽  
Scientific Authority ◽  
Science And Politics

AbstractThis chapter analyzes the evolution of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) from a specialist organization of climate scientists into an institution at the nexus of science and politics. We explain how the IPCC became the primary scientific authority for policymakers, the public, and climate activists on the existence, severity, consequences of, and, increasingly, possible solutions to anthropogenic climate change. We assess its influence on policymakers and governments, while examining the various tensions, critiques, and contradictions that the organization and its leaders have had to grapple with across its 32-year history, during which it successfully developed a distinct identity as a trusted provider of comprehensive scientific assessments. Our analysis also focuses on the institutional reforms that helped restore legitimacy to IPCC after ‘climategate’ and other controversies.

Climate change and global risk

2008 ◽  
Author(s):  
David Frame ◽  
Myles R. Allen
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
Temperature Response ◽  
Scientific Uncertainty ◽  
Earth System ◽  
Global Risk ◽  
Intergovernmental Panel ◽  
The Public ◽  
Scientific Discussion ◽  
Global Mean Temperature ◽  
History Of

Climate change is among the most talked about and investigated global risks. No other environmental issue receives quite as much attention in the popular press, even though the impacts of pandemics and asteroid strikes, for instance, may be much more severe. Since the first Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) report in 1990, significant progress has been made in terms of (1) establishing the reality of anthropogenic climate change and (2) understanding enough about the scale of the problem to establish that it warrants a public policy response. However, considerable scientific uncertainty remains. In particular scientists have been unable to narrow the range of the uncertainty in the global mean temperature response to a doubling of carbon dioxide from pre-industrial levels, although we do have a better understanding of why this is the case. Advances in science have, in some ways, made us more uncertain, or at least aware of the uncertainties generated by previously unexamined processes. To a considerable extent these new processes, as well as familiar processes that will be stressed in new ways by the speed of twentyfirst century climate change, underpin recent heightened concerns about the possibility of catastrophic climate change. Discussion of ‘tipping points’ in the Earth system (for instance Kemp, 2005; Lenton, 2007) has raised awareness of the possibility that climate change might be considerably worse than we have previously thought, and that some of the worst impacts might be triggered well before they come to pass, essentially suggesting the alarming image of the current generation having lit the very long, slow-burning fuse on a climate bomb that will cause great devastation to future generations. Possible mechanisms through which such catastrophes could play out have been developed by scientists in the last 15 years, as a natural output of increased scientific interest in Earth system science and, in particular, further investigation of the deep history of climate. Although scientific discussion of such possibilities has usually been characteristically guarded and responsible, the same probably cannot be said for the public debate around such notions.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document